Read the passage below and identify which of the

Solution

Analysis of the Argument: The passage highlights a gap between high spending on transit and poor results (increased commute times). To strengthen this, we need evidence that the infrastructure is still insufficient or poorly planned. Statement I follows: This strengthens the argument by showing a specific "adequacy gap." If 40% of neighborhoods aren't reached by the new subways, the infrastructure remains inadequate to serve the population, explaining why congestion persists. Statement II follows: This strengthens the argument by identifying a flaw in the "utilization" of the funds. If the new buses are stuck in traffic, the infrastructure expansion failed to address the core problem of flow, supporting the claim that the setup is inadequate. Statement III is incorrect: This is a policy move regarding vehicle taxation. While it relates to traffic, it describes an attempt to fix the problem through regulation rather than providing evidence that the existing infrastructure is inadequate. It neither strengthens nor weakens the specific claim about the inadequacy of the physical transit network.